Page 172 - The ISA Handbook in Contemporary Sociology

9781412934633-Chap-10 1/10/09 8:45 AM Page 143

SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF PROFESSIONS 143

Professionalization and market that the central question should be – why do
states create professions, or at least permit
closure
professions to flourish? This has resulted in a
Following this institutional diversion, sociol- renewed interest in the historical evidence
ogists became sceptical about the whole idea about the parallel processes of the creation
of professionalism. The emphasis on occupa- of modern nation-states in the second half of
tional cooperation shifted to aspects of occu- the nineteenth century and of modern profes-
pational competition and conflict. The 1970s sions in the same period (Perkin, 1988). It
and 1980s produced a highly critical set of also resulted in renewed interest in compara-
literature on professions where the key tive analysis as well as in consideration of
concept was the processes of professionaliza- professional occupations in Europe where,
tion, particularly in dominant and powerful for the most part, the concept of profession
occupational groups such as medicine and (if it existed at all) was used and interpreted
law. During this period professionalism came by sociologists in rather different ways.
to be dismissed as a successful ideology
(Johnson, 1972) and professionalization was
interpreted as a process of market closure Return to professionalism: new
and monopoly control of work (Larson, directions
1977) and occupational dominance (Larkin,
1983). Professionalization was intended to In the 1990s researchers began to reassess
promote professionals’own occupational self the significance of professionalism and its
interests in terms of their salary, status and positive (as well as negative) contributions
power as well as the monopoly protection of both for customers and clients, as well as for
an occupational jurisdiction (Abbott, 1988). social systems. Freidson (1994, 2001), for
A further development of this theorizing example, has argued that professionalism is a
was the linking of gender and occupational unique form of occupational control of work
closure. Witz (1992) examined how both which has distinct advantages over market
men and women engaged in professional or organizational and bureaucratic forms of
projects but, because they had differential control. As already indicated, to an extent
access to resources, gender necessarily influ- this indicates a return to the concept of pro-
enced both the form and the outcome of the fessionalism as a normative value which was
closure projects. developed by Parsons (1951).
Since the mid-1980s, the flaws in the more In addition there are new directions in the
extreme versions of this view of profession- analysis (Evetts, 2003). This interpretation
alization as market closure and occupational involves the examination of professionalism
power, dominance and competition have as a discourse of occupational change and
become apparent (e.g., Annandale, 1998). In control in occupational groups and work
particular, radical governments have success- organizations where the discourse is increas-
fully challenged the professions and intro- ingly applied and utilized by managers.
duced regulatory regimes which include Fournier (1999) considers the appeal to ‘pro-
target setting, performance review, manageri- fessionalism’ as a disciplinary mechanism in
alist regimes and accountability measures. new occupational contexts. She suggests how
One line of development has been the view the use of the discourse of professionalism in
that the demand-led theory of professional- a large privatized service company of mana-
ization needs to be complemented by an gerial labour serves to inculcate ‘appropriate’
understanding of the supply side (Dingwall, work identities, conducts and practices. She
1996). Thus, instead of the question – how do considers this as ‘a disciplinary logic which
professions capture states? – it is suggested inscribes “autonomous” professional practice